one film/one developer

greenspun.com : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Film & Processing : One Thread

This is a question about getting consistent results.

Hi folks. After a very long layoff, I am going to start processing my own B&W film in my own bathroom darkroom. I was a Graphic Arts undergrad many years ago, so I understand the process and I have processed hundreds of rolls. But that was over 25 yrs ago. I have been shooting 35mm color transparencies for the last few years.

I want to use one film and one developer at first. I think I am going to start with Ilford FP4/D-76. I will be processing 35mm, 6X9-120 film, and 4X5 sheet film. I will be using stainless reels for the rollfilm in daylight, and 8 X 10 trays for the sheet film in total darkness. Here is my question. Is it reasonable to expect similar densities and contrasts from using tanks and trays? My goal is to become proficient with 1 emulsion/1 developer first before I begin to introduce other variables. My concern is with the different agitation techniques. Any pointers or advice from you folks? Thanks.

-- joseph wasko (jwasko@erols.com), November 30, 2000

Answers

This is a related question.

I plan to use a Graylab timer to time the sheet film in total darkness. My timer is old, and I don't know how strong the phosphorescent paint is on the numbers. I will keep the timer at least 3 feet from the developer tray. Does anyone know if paint is available to spruce up the numbers if I can't see them? Any advice?

-- joseph wasko (jwasko@erols.com), November 30, 2000.


Joesph, I have always had different developintimes with the same film/developer combination for different sizes. Not only the difference between tray and tank development, which have substantially different agitation schemes, but also tank development of different sizes, i.e 35mm and 120. I suspect this is because of the difference in enlarging ratios, and fluid dymamics in different size tanks with different size film. Also, in order to reduce grain, 35mm film should be optimized for printing on grade 3 paper while 4x5 and 120 should be tailored for grade 2. I imagine you will have to test each one. As for the timer, clean the numbers and hope. If they still aren't bright enough, get some flourescent stickers and cut them up with scissors and apply them where needed (usually it is the moving hands that are the most important). Hope this helps, ;^D)

-- Doremus Scudder (ScudderLandreth@compuserve.com), December 01, 2000.

Good plan & good advice from D.S. On the timer, mine is 28 years old and still plenty luminous. If it's too dark, pop it once or twice with an electronic flash before your darkroom session. The UV will charge it right up. At 3' away, you shouldn't have any fogging problems with FP4 (my favorite film).

-- Conrad Hoffman (choffman@rpa.net), December 01, 2000.

Hey Doremus, your response caught my eye since I'm about to buy paper for the first time in 20 years. I always was taught to tune my film and developer to grade 2(35mm). Can you give me a brief explanation/reason for using grade 3 with 35mm, or point me to some web site with similar information (or both). Thanks.

John

-- John Kilmer (tcompton@citlink.net), December 02, 2000.


It's reasonable to expect to obtain simliar EIs and CIs using the same emulsion in different formats _as long as agitation is the same_. Assuming you'd use intermittent agitation for the tanks and continuous agitation with the tray method, the high end of the curve shape _may_ be straighter when using continuous agitation. If this occurs, this would most likely be in a density range much higher than you'd ever get onto the paper.

Traditionally small-format film benefits from being developed a bit less than larger formats; the reason is that more development increases graininess and decreases sharpness. It also requires a lower EI for the small-format film and printing on higher-contrast paper. Otoh there's no reason at all for not standardizing on development specs for small-format film and printing large formats on higher-contrast paper too.

I do all my testing with 35mm and use the same EIs and development specs for all sizes; results are as expected.

Specifically D-76; I don't find any significant difference between whether intermittent or continuous agitation is used. Also, D-76 1:3 works very well with no exhaustion concerns.

You'd benefit _greatly_ by sticking with one film/developer combination and getting to know it extremely well; your work will be of much higher technical quality than that of someone who's always bouncing around between new miracle films and magic juices.

-- John Hicks (jbh@magicnet.net), December 02, 2000.



Thanks for your responses, both online and offline. I think I am going to enjoy this process. As time permits, I hope to be moving forward soon. Thanks again.

-- Joseph Wasko (jwasko@erols.com), December 05, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ